Comments on: When Liberals Attack: Alterman V. Klein http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/ Rory O'Connor's blog Sun, 07 Sep 2008 10:29:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 by: Alan http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/#comment-1192 Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:33:20 +0000 http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/#comment-1192 Let's see, Joe Klein dismisses Alterman's remarks because they are so egregious and then proceeds to address those remarks. Klein then evidences Alterman's lack of journalistic integrity by claiming Alterman has never even phoned Klein. But it is Klein's own integrity that is in jeopardy as a phone call would not have shined any light on Klein's work product and thus is irrelevant to the topic. But confusing the issue is not enough for Klein who then proceeds to personally attack Alterman for his "essential narcissistic laziness" and for being "so peripheral". Huh? This is either outright dishonesty or wishful thinking on the part of Klein. The ubiquitous Alterman seems to put out a new book yearly (some of them bestsellers), writes for the Nation, maintains a daily blog, is a senior fellow at a think tank, teaches and allegedly still finds time to sleep. Clearly peripheral and lazy. But just in case Klein had not lost all of his credibility, he raises the ridiculousness level to red by boasting that he, like all good reporters, would just stick to the facts. No need for Joe Klein to resort to the behavior of an ever so peripheral, lazy, joke of a reporter who spews worthless information, and, uh, who thinks he is sooo smart. Then after providing zero facts, Klein who has now ranted longer on Alterman than your typical Bill O'Reilly rant on Hillary Clinton, finishes by once again asserting that Alterman was not worth responding to because he doesn't know his stuff. To Recap: 1) Dismiss as outrageous, 2) attack integrity of accuser, 3) obfuscate and mislead, 4) name call, name call, name call, name call, 5) hit opponent's strengths in face of overwhelming evidence to contrary, 6) claim facts support you without providing facts, 7) dismiss again, 8) name call again. Quite frankly, I thought this was a parody upon my first read and I now find myself embarrassed for the guy. Saturday Night Live wishes it could do comedy this well. However, just because Joe Klein has decided to play the fool, it does not mean that Alterman is without fault. And Alterman should be chastised for criticizing Klein for relying on U.S. intelligence officials as sources when Klein actually does much worse -- failing to source at all his claim that the domestic data gathering/spying program as "helped foil several plots and disrupt al-Qaeda operations". Probably just another case of Alterman's laziness getting the best of him. Let’s see, Joe Klein dismisses Alterman’s remarks because they are so egregious and then proceeds to address those remarks. Klein then evidences Alterman’s lack of journalistic integrity by claiming Alterman has never even phoned Klein. But it is Klein’s own integrity that is in jeopardy as a phone call would not have shined any light on Klein’s work product and thus is irrelevant to the topic.

But confusing the issue is not enough for Klein who then proceeds to personally attack Alterman for his “essential narcissistic laziness” and for being “so peripheral”. Huh? This is either outright dishonesty or wishful thinking on the part of Klein. The ubiquitous Alterman seems to put out a new book yearly (some of them bestsellers), writes for the Nation, maintains a daily blog, is a senior fellow at a think tank, teaches and allegedly still finds time to sleep. Clearly peripheral and lazy.

But just in case Klein had not lost all of his credibility, he raises the ridiculousness level to red by boasting that he, like all good reporters, would just stick to the facts. No need for Joe Klein to resort to the behavior of an ever so peripheral, lazy, joke of a reporter who spews worthless information, and, uh, who thinks he is sooo smart. Then after providing zero facts, Klein who has now ranted longer on Alterman than your typical Bill O’Reilly rant on Hillary Clinton, finishes by once again asserting that Alterman was not worth responding to because he doesn’t know his stuff.

To Recap: 1) Dismiss as outrageous, 2) attack integrity of accuser, 3) obfuscate and mislead, 4) name call, name call, name call, name call, 5) hit opponent’s strengths in face of overwhelming evidence to contrary, 6) claim facts support you without providing facts, 7) dismiss again, 8) name call again.

Quite frankly, I thought this was a parody upon my first read and I now find myself embarrassed for the guy. Saturday Night Live wishes it could do comedy this well.

However, just because Joe Klein has decided to play the fool, it does not mean that Alterman is without fault. And Alterman should be chastised for criticizing Klein for relying on U.S. intelligence officials as sources when Klein actually does much worse — failing to source at all his claim that the domestic data gathering/spying program as “helped foil several plots and disrupt al-Qaeda operations”. Probably just another case of Alterman’s laziness getting the best of him.

]]> by: D. F. Chant http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/#comment-1191 Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:20:14 +0000 http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/#comment-1191 Call me a concerned Canadian that happened on this discussion. Little happens in U.S. politics that fails to impact my home at some point, so I pay attention to what happens there. Having read this post, and the other 3 columns/posts in the exchange, I had to put my 2 cents in. Regards Klein's response, he seems to have caught himself with the brush he used to tar Alterman. There's no shortage of ego, enmity, or 'snark' on either side of the argument, but while Alterman attacks Klein professionally, Klein responds personally. Moving into 'substance', Klein's questioning the use of the term 'wiretapping' (seemingly) because it doesn't use wires is weak, especially on the heels of an admission he has to "learn more about it." Suggesting the dispute can be laid to rest with "an updating of the FISA Act or the Patriot Act" is ludicrous. Making legal this week what was, for good reason, illegal last week isn't likely to settle anyone's doubts. Quite the contrary, I'd hope. However, it was Klein's statement that “People like me who favor this program don’t yet know enough about it yet” that settled it for me. I'm no journalist, but I'd never buy a car without looking under the hood. Where politicians and their agendas are concerned, for anyone else to make such a statement of blind acceptance is cause to question their sanity. For a columnist in a major publication, a self-professed reporter, whose job it should be to question everything, it's cause to question how it is he's still employed. Call me a concerned Canadian that happened on this discussion. Little happens in U.S. politics that fails to impact my home at some point, so I pay attention to what happens there. Having read this post, and the other 3 columns/posts in the exchange, I had to put my 2 cents in.

Regards Klein’s response, he seems to have caught himself with the brush he used to tar Alterman. There’s no shortage of ego, enmity, or ’snark’ on either side of the argument, but while Alterman attacks Klein professionally, Klein responds personally.

Moving into ’substance’, Klein’s questioning the use of the term ‘wiretapping’ (seemingly) because it doesn’t use wires is weak, especially on the heels of an admission he has to “learn more about it.”

Suggesting the dispute can be laid to rest with “an updating of the FISA Act or the Patriot Act” is ludicrous. Making legal this week what was, for good reason, illegal last week isn’t likely to settle anyone’s doubts. Quite the contrary, I’d hope.

However, it was Klein’s statement that “People like me who favor this program don’t yet know enough about it yet” that settled it for me. I’m no journalist, but I’d never buy a car without looking under the hood.

Where politicians and their agendas are concerned, for anyone else to make such a statement of blind acceptance is cause to question their sanity.

For a columnist in a major publication, a self-professed reporter, whose job it should be to question everything, it’s cause to question how it is he’s still employed.

]]> by: Bob http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/#comment-1186 Sat, 28 Jan 2006 06:21:16 +0000 http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/#comment-1186 Klein is a windbag. Most of his writing is ideologically motivated establishment propaganda. When the record demonstrates abusiveness, dishonesty, and bad faith, is making note of it ad hominum? Klein is a windbag. Most of his writing is ideologically motivated establishment propaganda.

When the record demonstrates abusiveness, dishonesty, and bad faith, is making note of it ad hominum?

]]> by: Francis v. Scalzi http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/#comment-1185 Sat, 28 Jan 2006 06:20:53 +0000 http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/#comment-1185 Joe Who? Klein? For quite a while his name was Mr. Anonomous. Of course, that was after he wrote his famous colorful novel that the Clinton haters drooled over. Before that his name was Mr. Nobody. Here's a guy who built his future career on writing a "fictious" novel all about Bill Clinton knowing perfectly well that everyone knew whom he was victimizing. A roman a clef that Mr. Anonomous didn't have the decency to put his name on. In my book his name is Mr. Scummy Opportunist, or better Mr. Bottom Feeder. So Time Magazine hires the bum and he gets his reward. He is an example of what has sent American journalism into the gutter. Joe Who? Klein? For quite a while his name was Mr. Anonomous. Of course, that was after he wrote his famous colorful novel that the Clinton haters drooled over. Before that his name was Mr. Nobody. Here’s a guy who built his future career on writing a “fictious” novel all about Bill Clinton knowing perfectly well that everyone knew whom he was victimizing. A roman a clef that Mr. Anonomous didn’t have the decency to put his name on. In my book his name is Mr. Scummy Opportunist, or better Mr. Bottom Feeder. So Time Magazine hires the bum and he gets his reward. He is an example of what has sent American journalism into the gutter.

]]> by: Bill http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/#comment-1184 Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:31:35 +0000 http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2006/01/25/when-liberals-attack-alterman-v-klein/#comment-1184 The problem with calling what Alterman wrote an "ad hominem" attack is not so much a misuse of the term as it is treating a line or two of "ad hominem" comment as if it were the whole attack. Agree or not, Alterman made specific substantive arguments directed to what Klein had written, along with a sentence or two directed at Klein. Klein, on the other hand, seems merely to have unleased a stream of "ad hominem" invective unsupported by anything. Klein's attack was entirely ad hominem; Alterman made at worst a couple of ad hominem sideswipes in the course of a substantive attack. The problem with calling what Alterman wrote an “ad hominem” attack is not so much a misuse of the term as it is treating a line or two of “ad hominem” comment as if it were the whole attack. Agree or not, Alterman made specific substantive arguments directed to what Klein had written, along with a sentence or two directed at Klein. Klein, on the other hand, seems merely to have unleased a stream of “ad hominem” invective unsupported by anything. Klein’s attack was entirely ad hominem; Alterman made at worst a couple of ad hominem sideswipes in the course of a substantive attack.

]]>